DOCSLIB.ORG

Memo: Where Is Downing Street? … an Opinion Page Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Memo: Where Is Downing Street? … an Opinion Page Analysis Article No. # Memo: Where is Downing Street? … An Opinion Page Analysis. Benjamin Eveloff Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville Abstract First appearing in the United State’s national media during the summer of 2005 the Downing Street memo is a document that was leaked from a 2002 meeting with the British Prime Minister Tony Blair. The memo stated that the Bush Administration had intentions of going to war with Iraq 8 months prior to when the war began and even planned on going to war if weapons of mass destruction were not found by inspectors. If the document was shown to be credible it could have turned American public opinion against the war and the administration. Using framing theory the author looked at a total of 16 opinion pieces that dealt with the Downing Street memo. The researcher used textual analysis to look at each writer’s opinion of how important they believed the memo was to telling the full story. Findings showed that 81 percent of opinion piece writers believed that they media should have covered the memo more thoroughly. Introduction On May 1, 2005, The London Sunday Times published a story about a British intelligence memo leaked from a July 23, 2002 prime minister’s meeting (Manning, 2005). The memo, now called the Downing Street memo, stated that 8 months before the Iraq war began, President Bush’s administration planned on fighting a war regardless of whether or not weapons of mass destruction were found. “It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbors, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea, or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force” (Manning, 2005). After the story first ran on May 1, the American media were slow to follow with coverage of the document. On May 2, the New York Times mentioned the memo in a story about Tony Blair’s reelection, and the Los Angeles Times, and Washington Post each waited a week to write a story. A month after the Downing Street memo had been made public; the Associated Press wrote its first story on the topic. News organizations did not begin to talk in-depth about the memo until after a June 7, 2005 news conference where President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair were both asked about it (Rieder, 2005). The Issue When a document is leaked with implications such as these it is the duty of the American media to investigate it. Because the press is seen to serve a watchdog function for the American people they must examine subjects of this nature (Hohenberg, 1971). The responsibility for the press to act in this manner is very important to the idea of American democracy. A key in fulfilling this obligation to the American citizens would be to examine a document that puts into question a government’s reasoning for a war that has cost taxpayers millions of dollars while leading to the deaths of U.S. soldiers and Iraqis. By May 2005, Congress approved about $192 billion for the Iraq war, another $58 billion for Afghanistan, and about $20 billion to enhance air security and other Pentagon preparedness measures. In total that is $270 billion for military operations since 2001 (Grier, 2005). “More spending on the war is sure to come — even if the U.S. begins to draw down troops levels. While it is difficult to estimate precisely, it is sure to be in the hundreds of billions, experts say. The Congressional Research Service pegs the cost of U.S. operations in Iraq and Afghanistan at an additional $458 billion through 2014” (Grier, 2005). This study has built on previous research conducted by Kim, 2000; Van Belle, 2000; and Livingston and Bennett, 2003, on the United States’ media coverage of foreign nations. Also, work done on stories that most effectively attract news consumer’s attention will be analyzed to provide insight into what they want to read. Studies on framing theory will also be looked at since it will be the basis for interpreting each piece. While applying framing theory, this study will examine the importance each author gives to the Downing Street memo. Looking at the frames used by each writer will help the researcher to explain how every individual rationalizes his or her opinion. The fact that authors are writing about the Downing Street memo does not constitute a view of its importance, thus the actual opinions they express will be analyzed. Each sample will be analyzed by the researcher to find how each editorial and opinion piece is framed. Since the opinion section acts as the paper’s “voice”, views expressed toward what is important in the world should translate to the news section. Opinion pages, unlike the hard news section, offer the ability to express views on any subject. The purpose of this study is not to decide if the memo is true, it is to find the writers’ opinions about how it was covered. Research Questions R1: Will the views expressed by the writers show a belief of weak coverage by the United States media on the Downing Street Memo? R2: What percentage of pieces analyzed show a belief that the Downing Street Memo is a credible document? R3: If the writers do believe the United States media did not cover the memo properly, what factors will they believe lead to the lack of coverage? The researcher will be looking for opinions within the pieces that point to a belief of importance or unimportance by each author. The researcher will analyze positive and negative aspects. If an author says the memo is important or that it should have been looked at more by the media, that point will show a positive opinion of the memo. The belief that an idea should be further researched illustrates an interest of the document in the writer. A piece will be seen as negative if the writer does not believe the memo is important, or if it is discredited. An example of discrediting the document would be to say that the memo is just a form of liberal propaganda. An example of the liberal media argument is illustrated in Michael Kinsley’s Baltimore Sun column. Literature Review Studies on International News Hargrove and Stempel III (2002) looked for what type of international news readers are most interested in. To do this they used a national telephone survey of 1,007 randomly selected adults from June 17 to June 28, 2001. Interviewers read twenty headlines to them and ask how interested they would be to hear about each. The researchers recorded people who said they would be “very interested” to read each story since those people would be most likely to read the story. The study found that good news (news in a positive tone) is more popular than bad news (negative tone). It was also found that international stories about politics are not as popular as stories about an average person making news. Another finding was that international stories featuring Americans draw an above average interest from the sample. Some gatekeepers have argued that Americans do not care about foreign news. This argument is flawed in that if a reader does not care what news is presented he or she will probably not purchase the paper and readership will be lost. Some of the findings in this study support that idea, showing that Americans in the study care more about non-governmental news about an average person. But the study also showed that participants were more interested in foreign news that included Americans. Lehmann (2005) used qualitative research to focus on the differences in the media coverage of UN weapons inspectors by the United States and Germany. Coverage from one print and one television outlet in each country were analyzed. Print coverage included the New York Times and the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Television programs analyzed were NBC Nightly News and Die Taqesschau. Nine different events were analyzed in the research that were believed to be important events in the UN weapons process. The researcher also looked at both hard news stories and opinion sections from the newspapers. Findings of the study illustrated that U.S. and German media acted quite differently in covering the UN weapons inspectors. U.S. media seemed to be stuck on the idea of a “War on Terror” and commonly associated Saddam Hussein with Sept. 11, 2001, doing nothing to clear up those assumptions although there was never a proven connection. The German media did not challenge the weapons inspector’s honesty. Similarities were found in the editorials of the New York Times and Allgemeine Zeitung, but not in the nightly television shows. While Die Taqesschau continued to report its news with opinions from both side of the issue, the NBC nightly news began using the title “The Road to War.” The German program used sources from both sides of the issue while NBC used “experts” on the situation who did not express a wide range of opinions. The relationship drawn between Iraq and the terrorists attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 caused U.S. reporters to present “Patriotic Journalism,” in which they would report the stories in a manner that turned the war into an event where the anchors presented a “we are going to go get them” attitude, rather than presenting perspectives from both sides of the fighting.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Parliamentary Debates (Hansard)
    Wednesday Volume 494 24 June 2009 No. 98 HOUSE OF COMMONS OFFICIAL REPORT PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) Wednesday 24 June 2009 £5·00 © Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2009 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click-Use Licence, available online through the Office of Public Sector Information website at www.opsi.gov.uk/click-use/ Enquiries to the Office of Public Sector Information, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 4DU; Tel: 0044 (0) 208876344; e-mail: [email protected] 777 24 JUNE 2009 778 rightly made the case. I hope she will understand when I House of Commons point her to the work of the World Bank and other international financial institutions on infrastructure in Wednesday 24 June 2009 Ukraine and other countries. We will continue to watch the regional economic needs of Ukraine through our involvement with those institutions. The House met at half-past Eleven o’clock Mr. Gary Streeter (South-West Devon) (Con): Given PRAYERS the strategic significance of Ukraine as a political buffer zone between the EU and Russia, does the Minister not think that it was perhaps an error of judgment to close [MR.SPEAKER in the Chair] the DFID programme in Ukraine last year? It would be an utter tragedy if Ukraine’s democracy should fail, so BUSINESS BEFORE QUESTIONS should we not at the very least be running significant capacity-building programmes to support it? SPOLIATION ADVISORY PANEL Resolved, Mr. Thomas: We are running capacity-building programmes on democracy and good governance through That an Humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, That she will be graciously pleased to give directions that there be laid the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
    [Show full text]
  • June 7 / Administration of George W. Bush, 2005 Governments, to Speak Their Minds, and to Pursue a Good Life for Their Families
    June 7 / Administration of George W. Bush, 2005 governments, to speak their minds, and to mitted to doing more in the future. We pursue a good life for their families, they also agree that highly indebted developing build a strong, prosperous, and just society. countries that are on the path to reform This is the vision chosen by Iraqis in should not be burdened by mountains of elections in January, and the United States debt. Our countries are developing a pro- and Britain will stand with the Iraqi people posal for the G–8 that will eliminate 100 as they continue their journey toward free- percent of that debt, and that, by providing dom and democracy. We’ll support Iraqis additional resources, will preserve the fi- as they take the lead in providing their nancial integrity of the World Bank and own security. Our strategy is clear: We’re the African Development Bank. training Iraqi forces so they can take the As we work with African nations to de- fight to the enemy, so they can defend their country. And then our troops will velop democratic institutions and vibrant come home with the honor they have economies that will provide greater oppor- earned. tunity for all Africans, we must also address By spreading freedom throughout the emergency needs. I’m pleased to announce broader Middle East, we’ll end the bitter- the United States will provide approxi- ness and hatred that feed the ideology of mately $674 million of additional resources terror. We’re working together to help to respond to humanitarian emergencies in build the democratic institutions of a future Africa.
    [Show full text]
  • Moral Responsibility in a Time of War 1
    Moral Responsibility in a Time of War 1 Moral Responsibility in a Time of War William F. Felice* Introduction N A DAILY BASIS, MOST OF US MAKE ETHICAL1 JUDGMENTS ALL THE TIME IN RELATION to private action. We make moral judgments about individuals who murder, cheat, lie, and steal. We expect that individuals will act on “universal” Oprinciples in their treatment of others independent of race, gender, sexuality, and class. At the national level, appeals to the public good and the responsibilities and duties of public office are also based on ethical judgments. I am concerned with levels of moral responsibility and accountability. In large bureaucracies (corporations, governments, and universities), it is often difficult to attribute moral responsibility to anyone. Dennis Thompson calls this the problem of “many hands.” When an action of the government causes harm to innocents, it is often difficult to trace the “fingerprints of responsibility” to individual actors. There is a tendency to deny the responsibility of an individual person, instead attributing blame abstractly to “the system,” the government, or “the state.” Citizens often feel unable to connect criticisms of the government with the actions of individuals inside the structures of the state (Thompson, 1987: 5–6). The decisions leading to the war and occupation of Iraq were ultimately made at the highest levels of the U.S. and British governments. Legal and moral respon- sibility lies with the president, prime minister, and their cabinets, since hierarchical responsibility does coincide with moral responsibility. Yet, can an ethical analysis of the war stop with the actions of the president, prime minister, and their princi- pal advisers? Should others in the government also be held to standards of moral accountability? The actions of Colin Powell are examined in depth because of his position as secretary of state.
    [Show full text]
  • The Coalition of the Unwilling: Contentious Politics, Political Opportunity
    Chapman University Chapman University Digital Commons Sociology Faculty Articles and Research Sociology 2011 The oC alition of the Unwilling: Contentious Politics, Political Opportunity Structures, and Challenges for the Contemporary Peace Movement Victoria Carty Chapman University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/sociology_articles Part of the American Politics Commons, International Relations Commons, Military Studies Commons, Models and Methods Commons, and the Politics and Social Change Commons Recommended Citation Carty, Victoria. 2011. "The oC alition of the Unwilling: Contentious Politics, Political Opportunity Structures, and Challenges for the Contemporary Peace Movement." Peace and Conflict Studies 18(1): 79-115. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Sociology at Chapman University Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Sociology Faculty Articles and Research by an authorized administrator of Chapman University Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The oC alition of the Unwilling: Contentious Politics, Political Opportunity Structures, and Challenges for the Contemporary Peace Movement Comments This article was originally published in Peace and Conflict Studies, volume 18, issue 1, in 2011. Copyright Nova Southeastern University This article is available at Chapman University Digital Commons: http://digitalcommons.chapman.edu/sociology_articles/10 The Coalition of the Unwilling: Contentious Politics, Political Opportunity Structures, and Challenges for the Contemporary Peace Movement Victoria Carty Abstract The Bush Doctrine, which was installed after the 9-11 attacks on the United States under the guise of the war on terrorism, postulated a vision of the United States as the world’s unchallenged superpower and the invasion of Iraq became one of the central fronts of this war.
    [Show full text]
  • The War for the Greater Middle East Professor Andrew Bacevich
    The War for the Greater Middle East Professor Andrew Bacevich Purpose. The purpose of this course is to invite students to consider an alternative to the conventional grand narrative of twentieth century political history. Rather than centered on Great Power competition for dominance in Eurasia, this alternative emphasizes the interaction between the West and the peoples of the Islamic world. In terms of chronology, the course will recount events since 1914. In terms of scope, it will focus on three specific zones of conflict: the Persian Gulf (emphasizing Saudi Arabia, Iraq, and Iran); Palestine (that is, Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza); and the region that Washington currently refers to as AfPak. Approach. This is not a lecture course. We will learn collectively. All participants must come to class prepared to discuss the assigned questions. Researching those questions – which will probably increase in number as we go along -- is an individual responsibility: no spoon feeding. If you need help getting started, see the instructor. Keep this in mind: Our interest in the past is informed by our concern for the present and the future. So be alert to the policy implications of the history we are studying. Course requirements. Attendance and class participation (20%); Oral presentation (20%) – one per student; twenty minutes in-class addressing a “vignette;” see instructor before beginning preparation; Book review (30%) – maximum of 2000 words, book chosen from list below; a review will typically a) identify and “situate” the author; b) summarize the book; c) engage the argument presented in the book. Final exam (30%) Administration.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Failure of Compliance with Article 20 Prohibiting Propaganda for War
    REPORT ON FAILURE OF COMPLIANCE WITH ARTICLE 20 PROHIBITING PROPAGANDA FOR WAR prepared for the UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHT COMMITTEE Eighty-seventh session for its review of the Second and Third Periodic Report of the United States of America under the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights June 2006 INTRODUCTION This report regarding United States violations of Article 20, paragraph one, is submitted to the Committee to inform and support its consideration of the paramount issues the Committee requested the United States to address in its written and oral presentation to the Committee in July, 2006. Article 20 of the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights implicitly recognizes that the condition of war jeopardizes the integrity and exercise of all of the political and civil rights elsewhere declared in the Covenant. The Committee has expressed concern and requested clarification of actions and policies of the United States which are in apparent violation of even the core, non-derogable protections States Parties undertake to assure under the treaty. The US government has sought to justify its actions and policies on the basis of the “war on terror” and the exigencies of its illegal war in Iraq. Because of the pervasive impact of war the propaganda campaign prohibited by Article 20, the fear and xenophobia it stoked, and the resulting illegal war have all contributed to violations, both here and abroad, of many other rights protected by this Covenant including articles 1, 2, 6, 7, 9, 10, 13, 14, 17, 19, 21, 24, 26 and 27. The non-governmental organizations which have prepared this report regarding US violation of Article 20 are filing it with the Committee in order to bring greater visibility and attention to the full significance and implications of the Covenant’s prohibition of propaganda for war.
    [Show full text]
  • Appearances (Selected)
    PUBLIC APPEARANCES (SELECTED) Interview, NOW, MSNBC, w/Ari Melber, 12/27/12 Berkeley, CA "Torture and Zero Dark Thirty," North Gate Hall Studio. Seminar, “The US Elections and the Forever 11/9/12 Copenhagen, Denmark War,” Danish Institute for International Studies. Introduction, Mark Danner and Joshua 11/8/12 Copenhagen, Denmark Oppenheimer “The Act of Killing,” Copenhagen Documentary Festival. Panel, “Courthouse Dialogue on Film and 9/3/12 Tellruide, CO Injustice,” Joshua Oppenheimer, Peter Sellars and Mark Danner, The Courthouse, Telluride Film Festival. Introduction and Q&A, Dror Moreh, “The 9/2/12 Telluride, CO Gatekeepers,” The Sheridan Opera House, Telluride Film Festival. Talk, Ben Affleck, Dror Moreh, Michael 9/2/12 Telluride, CO Winterbottom, Ziad Doueiri, Joshua Oppenheimer and Mark Danner “Injustice, Reconciliation and Cinema,” Telluride Park, Telluride Film Festival. Q&A, “No,” Gael Garcia Bernal, Pablo 9/2/12 Telluride, CO Larrain, Chuck Jones Theatre, Telluride Film Festival. Q&A, “The Attack,” Ziad Doueiri and Mark 9/1/12 Telluride, CO Danner, The Mason’s Theatre, Telluride Film Festival. Q&A, “The Act of Killing,” Joshua 8/31/12 Telluride, CO Oppenheimer and Mark Danner, The Mason’s Theatre, Telluride Film Festival. Lecture, Helen Ingram Plummer Lecture, 4/19/12 Atlanta, GA “Living With the New Normal: Human Rights, US Foreign Policy and the 2012 Elections”, Georgia State University. Talk, Karen Malpede’s “Another Life”. 3/21/12 Brooklyn, NY Dialogue, Ray Bonner Dialogue, “Anatomy 3/15/12 Berkeley, CA of Injustice”, Boalt Hall, UC Berkeley Reading, Story Hour at Morrison Library, 3/8/12 Berkeley, CA UC Berkeley.
    [Show full text]
  • Is There a Constituency for Global Poverty? Jubilee 2000 and the Future of Development Advocacy
    00-1393-7 fm 7/16/08 5:00 PM Page i Global Development 2.0 Copyright 2008, the Brookings Institution 00-1393-7 fm 7/16/08 5:00 PM Page ii Copyright 2008, the Brookings Institution 00-1393-7 fm 7/16/08 5:00 PM Page iii Global Development 2.0 Can Philanthropists, the Public, and the Poor Make Poverty History? LAEL BRAINARD DEREK CHOLLET Editors brookings institution press Washington, D.C. Copyright 2008, the Brookings Institution 00-1393-7 fm 7/16/08 5:00 PM Page iv Copyright © 2008 the brookings institution 1775 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 www.brookings.edu All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the Brookings Institution Press. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data Global development 2.0 : can philanthropists, the public, and the poor make poverty history? / Lael Brainard, Derek Chollet, editors. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. Summary: “Celebrates the transformative trend within international aid of super- charged advocacy networks, mega-philanthropists, and mass public involvement through Internet charitable giving and increased overseas volunteering and offers lessons to ensure that this wave of generosity yields lasting and widespread improvements to the lives and prospects of the world’s poorest”—Provided by publisher. ISBN 978-0-8157-1393-7 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Poverty—Developing countries—Prevention. 2. Globalization. 3. Developing countries—Foreign economic relations. I. Brainard, Lael. II. Chollet, Derek H. III. Title: Global development two point oh.
    [Show full text]
  • The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution, and Coverups in the Iraq War
    The Constitution in Crisis: The Downing Street Minutes and Deception, Manipulation, Torture, Retribution, and Coverups in the Iraq War Chapter 1. Executive Summary ..............................................3 Chapter 2. Chronology: Last Throes of Credibility ..............................7 Chapter 3. Detailed Factual Findings .........................................17 A. Determination to go to War Before Congressional Authorization ...........17 1. Avenging the Father and Working With the Neo-Cons ..............18 2. September 11 and its Aftermath: Beating the Drums for War ........20 3. The Downing Street Minutes and Documentary Evidence of an Agreement to go to War ...............................................27 a. Description and Analysis of Various Downing Street Minutes Materials ...........................................28 b. Confirmation and Corroboration of Downing Street Minutes Materials ...........................................34 4. Manipulating Public Opinion ..................................38 5. Using the United Nations as a Pretext for War ....................45 B. Misstating and Manipulating the Intelligence to Justify Pre-emptive War .....53 1. Links to September 11 and al Qaeda ............................59 2. Resumed Efforts to Acquire Nuclear Weapons ....................68 3. Aluminum Tubes ...........................................73 4. Acquisition of Uranium from Niger .............................81 5. Chemical and Biological Weapons .............................88 C. Encouraging and Countenancing Torture
    [Show full text]
  • The Effects of the Internet on the 2003 Iraq
    Karatzogianni, A: `The Impact of the Internet during the Iraq war on the peace movement, war coverage and war-related cyberattacks', Cultural Technology and Policy Journal, Vol. 1, 2004. In the particular case of post-September 11 information warfare, the assertions of US unity by the Bush administration have resulted in a context in which public statements directed to the international community are interpreted as representative of the US as a political entity and not just the utterances of a particular individual in the current administration.1 Before and during the March 2003 Iraq war, information technologies, and particularly the internet, inspired several groups belonging to all sorts of different backgrounds and ideologies to voice their opinion on the war and in certain instances to engage in symbolic hacking against opposing groups or institutions. But still, the principal originality of this conflict was the effect of the internet on war coverage. This section looks at three levels of the internet's role in the conflict: its effect on the organisation and spread of the peace movement, its impact on war coverage and the issue of war-related cyberconflicts. Before delving deeper, it would be helpful to explain again that with the advent of the internet, new forms of conflict have emerged, not directly linked with information warfare but rather, connected to a more subtle form of societal netwar2, where new social movements, ethnic groups and terrorists use the internet to organise, acquire resources and attack `the other side'. Despite the high-tech name, the groups involved have quite traditional political goals - power, participation, democracy, alternative ideologies - using, however, a postmodern, interactive medium.
    [Show full text]
  • A Timeline of Events Relating to Iraq 1970-2011
    A Timeline of Events Relating to Iraq 1970-2011 1970-72 Iraq’s oil industry nationalized. 1979 Iran’s new Islamic government led by Ayatollah Khomeini sought to expand its religious and political influence across the Middle East, leading to tensions between Iraq and Iran, and between the Iraqi government and the Shi’a population. 1980 –1988 More than one million Iranians and Iraqis died during the Iran-Iraq. The US government secretly assisted both Iraqis and Iranians, including arms shipped as part of the Iran-Contra Affair. During "the war of the cities" civilians living in the major cities of both countries were deliberately targeted. Several thousand Iraqis including more than 4,000 Kurds in Halabja were killed by their own government, allegedly for assisting Iran. By war’s end, Iraq’s debt was $50 billion. 1990 Encouraged by Ambassador April Glaspie’s comment that the US had “no opinion on Arab- Arab conflicts,” Iraq invaded Kuwait over oil and debt issues. The UN Security Council quickly imposed economic sanctions until Iraqi troops withdrew from Kuwait. (Resolution 661) Arab efforts to resolve the situation were consistently undermined by the Bush Administration. 1991 Despite heavy opposition from their constituents, the Senate voted to go to war, influenced by testimony that Iraqi soldiers took Kuwaiti babies out of incubators; it later emerged that this testimony was invented by Hill and Knowlton on behalf of their client, Citizens for a Free Kuwait. Using bribes and threats, the US forged a “coalition of the willing” to oust Iraqi troops from Kuwait. US peace activists act as “human shields” hoping to affect US military operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Markup Before the Committee on International Relations House of Representatives One Hundred Ninth Congress
    REQUESTING THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTING THE SECRETARY OF STATE TO TRANSMIT TO THE HOUSE ALL INFORMATION RELATING TO COMMUNICATION WITH THE U.K. BETWEEN 1/1/02 AND 10/16/02 RELATING TO THE POLICY OF THE U.S. WITH RESPECT TO IRAQ; REQUESTING THE PRESIDENT AND DIRECTING THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE TO TRANSMIT TO THE HOUSE ALL DOCUMENTS RELATING TO COMMUNICA- TIONS WITH THE U.K. RELATING TO THE POLICY OF THE U.S. WITH RESPECT TO IRAQ; AND DIRECTING THE SEC- RETARY OF STATE TO TRANSMIT TO THE HOUSE DOCU- MENTS RELATING TO THE DISCLOSURE OF THE IDENTITY AND EMPLOYMENT OF MS. VALERIE PLAME MARKUP BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON H. Res. 375, H. Res. 408 and H. Res 419 SEPTEMBER 14, 2005 Serial No. 109-114 Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/internationaLrelations U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 23-436PDF WASHINGTON : 2006 For sale by the Superintendent of Doulments, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001 H461-25 COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois, Chairman JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa TOM LANTOS, California CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, HOWARD L. BERMAN, California Vice Chairman GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York DAN BURTON, Indiana ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American ELTON GALLEGLY, California Samoa ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida DONALD M.
    [Show full text]